About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5
subcommittee held a hearing tuesday on the constitutionality of the obama administration, using drugs to target terror suspects overseas. this has included u.s. military officials, constitutional law professors and again the activist whose villages had by a stream to strike causing civilian tragedies. [inaudible conversations] >> return of the subcommittee on the civil rights and human rights will come to order. today's hearing is entitled drone wars, the counterterrorism institutions of killing. senator cruises on its way from another hearing. there are conflicting schedules we face here. this is the first-ever public hearing in the senate to address the use of drones and targeted killing. we are pleased to have such a large audience for today's hearing that demonstrates the importance and timeliness of this issue. thank you to those hearing person, those watching live on c-span and is following a hearing on twitter and facebook you stand the hash type drone wars. the rules of the semiprivate outbursts, popular demonstrations of any kind. please be mindful of the service as we conduct this hea
. the report put out by the constitution project is critical of both bush and obama administration's. it includes former members of congress. this is 50 minutes. >> thank you for your leadership on the task force and i want to express my thanks to the constitution project, but also to all of my fellow task force members what they brought to the table in terms of experience, wisdom, public service really made a difference in the development of this project and important report. as jim mentioned, there's more than 24 findings and recommendations. we can't cover all of those this morning that we want to hit some of the highlights. we hope he will take the entire report, study it through and look at each of those recommendations. why is this report important? it's important because we as a nation have to get this right. i looked back in history to the time during world war ii that we in turn to some japanese-americans. at the time it seemed like the right and proper thing to do but in light of history, it was an error. as of today this report will hopefully put into focus some of the a
. bill clinton, vice president of obama, very difficult imagining. now i will start off by touching possible -- upon our alliance. my view is, something is wrong when you say that the u.s. is always on the giving end, and japan always on the receiving end. about tradition of security and our alliance. the japanese must stand tall as an equal and responsible ally to the u.s. the japanese must work hard as a guardian of international common goods, peace, prosperity, and democracy. in fact, that was my grandfather's grandfather's aspirations. when serious at the time u.s.-japan security treaty on september 8, 1951, in san francisco, he wrote that one day japan could work with the u.s. as an equal partner, to sustain the liberal international order. 62 years later, that aspiration still holds. it's my belief that japan has a normal responsibility to enhance peace, happiness, and democracy in the world. that's why, ladies and gentlemen, japan must begin its economic power, that's why we are working hard to turn around our economy, pushing what you call obi-economics. make no mistake we'r
to the number originally planned during the bush administration with president obama. i have a question for you with the russian government consulted or informed that the united states was considering this decision before the decision was made and if so, when it that occur? >> well, the answer is not to my knowledge. it was not russian government was not consulted in any way. it was not decision that policy was not decided based on any consideration of the russian government. incidentally i would add that those gbi also not only really alaska but some are -- california. >> okay. to your knowledge they were not consulted. the department were to dpd that additional missile defense systems were needed, to be deployed domestically or abroad. would the russian government be informed before the decision was made? >> first, i can't answer for the president. will they include any of our nato allies as part of our discussion? >> again, senator, i don't know about those talks that would be in the per view of the secretary of state and the white house. i have not been consulted on on the possibility what
in the obama administration. this is a military procedure in terms of the trial of this gentleman and i want to make sure the record is clear, even though the gentleman is a great member and has every right to question that is not something the department of justice's handling. >> i appreciate that. the only reason i bring it up is because mr. mchugh set in this interview that i'm not attorney and i don't buy the end, there were told the purple heartwarwon the ability to conct a fair trial.thansw by the secretary of themmpies the justice rtnthte no, we as i know come in the decision is to not influence in any way anything the justice department said, but i would look at that to the extent that had interaction with the defense department relay that to you. i think what congressman fattah has said is correct. this is a military investigation were not involved in making purple heart determinations. i'm just not aware of it. >> mr. rooney is accurate. mr. mchugh is that i'm not an attorney and i don't in the justice department. i think he's right before they did anything, they went to the justi
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5